Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26189000›Full record

ReviewPlanta2015

Tissue culture and associated biotechnological interventions for the improvement of coconut (Cocos nucifera L.): a review.

Quang Thien Nguyen, H D Dharshani Bandupriya, Arturo López-Villalobos, S Sisunandar, Mike Foale, Steve W Adkins

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Planta, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Towards Pathogen-Free Coconut Germplasm Exchange.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Fruit Biology of Coconut (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Quang Thien NguyenSchool of Agriculture and Food Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia. t.nguyen90@uq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0873-8013
H D Dharshani BandupriyaTissue Culture Division, Coconut Research Institute, Lunuwila, 61150, Sri Lanka.
Arturo López-VillalobosDepartment of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive N.W., Calgary, AB, Canada.
S SisunandarBiology Education Department, The University of Muhammadiyah, Purwokerto, Kampus Dukuhwaluh, Purwokerto, 53182, Indonesia.
Mike FoaleSchool of Agriculture and Food Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.
Steve W AdkinsSchool of Agriculture and Food Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

MAIN

conclusionThe present review discusses not only advances in coconut tissue culture and associated biotechnological interventions but also future research directions toward the resilience of this important palm crop. Coconut (Cocos nucifera L.) is commonly known as the 'tree of life'. Every component of the palm can be used to produce items of value and many can be converted into industrial products. Coconut cultivation faces a number of acute problems that reduce its productivity and competitiveness. These problems include various biotic and abiotic challenges as well as an unstable market for its traditional oil-based products. Around 10 million small-holder farmers cultivate coconut palms worldwide on c. 12 million hectares of land, and many more people own a few coconut palms that contribute to their livelihoods. Inefficiency in the production of seedlings for replanting remains an issue; however, tissue culture and other biotechnological interventions are expected to provide pragmatic solutions. Over the past 60 years, much research has been directed towards developing and improving protocols for (i) embryo culture; (ii) clonal propagation via somatic embryogenesis; (iii) homozygote production via anther culture; (iv) germplasm conservation via cryopreservation; and (v) genetic transformation. Recently other advances have revealed possible new ways to improve these protocols. Although effective embryo culture and cryopreservation are now possible, the limited frequency of conversion of somatic embryos to ex vitro seedlings still prevents the large-scale clonal propagation of coconut. This review illustrates how our knowledge of tissue culture and associated biotechnological interventions in coconut has so far developed. Further improvement of protocols and their application to a wider range of germplasm will continue to open up new horizons for the collection, conservation, breeding and productivity of coconut.

Indexed as

BiotechnologyCocosCryopreservationSeedsBiotechnologyCoconutCryopreservationEmbryo cultureGermplasm conservationSomatic embryogenesis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.